If law is failing, what would be my best alternative? Forum

[Patriot1208]

You go into law to practice law. You go into business to do business.

I sense as if many people are surprised that business professionals(especially those in finance) have high ceilings in this regard.

IB/Equities are especially lucrative imo.

Right, but you still gotta make it out of the Analyst / Associate ranks. Any idea what percentage get out of that?

I haven't looked it up; but to make an educated guess, I'd wager more than those who make big law partner.

I was at a Goldman Sachs info session on campus not that long ago and they said the initial contracts were two years and after that two years only ~50% of analysts were asked to stay. And usually around two thirds of those asked to stay actually did.

Now, many of those will still end up leaving because they will stall out and voluntary turnover is very high as people start wanting families. But also firms do recruit heavily out of PhD programs and MBA programs so it evens out. But once you are in investment banking, it's much easier to make a lot of money.

The real money is in trading anyways, fuck those M&A guys.

[AlabamaIceman]

.

[krasivaya]

You go into law to practice law. You go into business to do business.

I sense as if many people are surprised that business professionals(especially those in finance) have high ceilings in this regard.

IB/Equities are especially lucrative imo.

Right, but you still gotta make it out of the Analyst / Associate ranks. Any idea what percentage get out of that?

I haven't looked it up; but to make an educated guess, I'd wager more than those who make big law partner.

I was at a Goldman Sachs info session on campus not that long ago and they said the initial contracts were two years and after that two years only ~50% of analysts were asked to stay.

Ouch.

OP, ever thought about academia? With your public speaking passion it might be up your alley. Plus, you'll probably be teaching the same class over and over again so you won't need to know that much which seems like something you're worried about.

I'm not sure how competitive it is for law though, all I know about the professor track is via the PhD route.

[AlabamaIceman]

Thanks for the advice, I appreciate it.

I'll take the LSAT and base my decision some what on how I do there, but at the least I'll go to some of the recruiting fairs that might contain that sort of thing and see what goes down.

[Patriot1208]

Right, but you still gotta make it out of the Analyst / Associate ranks. Any idea what percentage get out of that?

I haven't looked it up; but to make an educated guess, I'd wager more than those who make big law partner.

I was at a Goldman Sachs info session on campus not that long ago and they said the initial contracts were two years and after that two years only ~50% of analysts were asked to stay.

Ouch.

OP, ever thought about academia? With your public speaking passion it might be up your alley. Plus, you'll probably be teaching the same class over and over again so you won't need to know that much which seems like something you're worried about.

I'm not sure how competitive it is for law though, all I know about the professor track is via the PhD route.

Legal academia may be the hardest job to get in the legal field and it is certainly one of the hardest.

[AlabamaIceman]

OP, ever thought about academia? With your public speaking passion it might be up your alley. Plus, you'll probably be teaching the same class over and over again so you won't need to know that much which seems like something you're worried about.

I'm not sure how competitive it is for law though, all I know about the professor track is via the PhD route.

I am honestly 100% lukewarm on the prospect of entering academia, there's really and truly nothing about it that flat-out appeals to me. I can imagine that the prestige is immense, but from other things I have glanced over on this site regarding the prospects of entering the field with law, it seems like the stakes are high in that area as well.

[ResolutePear]

OP, ever thought about academia? With your public speaking passion it might be up your alley. Plus, you'll probably be teaching the same class over and over again so you won't need to know that much which seems like something you're worried about.

I'm not sure how competitive it is for law though, all I know about the professor track is via the PhD route.

I am honestly 100% lukewarm on the prospect of entering academia, there's really and truly nothing about it that flat-out appeals to me. I can imagine that the prestige is immense, but from other things I have glanced over on this site regarding the prospects of entering the field with law, it seems like the stakes are high in that area as well.

UChic Phd -> Write a book -> Profit.

Repeat 10-20x while teaching classes -> Profit x 10-20.

Really, it's just that easy.

/sarcasm.

It seriously sounds like you just want to make bankroll though. Three years and 100k opening your own business sounds like a better investment.

[krasivaya]

Ouch.

OP, ever thought about academia? With your public speaking passion it might be up your alley. Plus, you'll probably be teaching the same class over and over again so you won't need to know that much which seems like something you're worried about.

I'm not sure how competitive it is for law though, all I know about the professor track is via the PhD route.

Legal academia may be the hardest job to get in the legal field and it is certainly one of the hardest.

Sadness, though not terribly surprising.

The professor track is a bitch for everyone, fighting for tenure sounds like one of the most stressful things you could possibly do.

[Patriot1208]

Also, regarding the compensation of investment bankers, if you have the time read through this and some of this guys other stuff. Basically, investment banker compensation isn't sustainable and we may have missed the boat. Stanford MBA's who went into investment banking made, on average, like three times (In BASE alone) what the other Stanford MBA's made in only a fifteen year span. And since most of them are making 7 figure bonuses, it's MUCH more than that.

http://people.umass.edu/crotty/RMFC%20p ... 202010.pdf

[DoubleChecks]

OP, ever thought about academia? With your public speaking passion it might be up your alley. Plus, you'll probably be teaching the same class over and over again so you won't need to know that much which seems like something you're worried about.

I'm not sure how competitive it is for law though, all I know about the professor track is via the PhD route.

I am honestly 100% lukewarm on the prospect of entering academia, there's really and truly nothing about it that flat-out appeals to me. I can imagine that the prestige is immense, but from other things I have glanced over on this site regarding the prospects of entering the field with law, it seems like the stakes are high in that area as well.

btw OP, when a lot of these ppl were talking about "being rich" in business, they mean like a mill or more a year...it is still quite reasonable/practical to be in the top 1-2% earning bracket of the US by graduating from a top law school

[dr123]

Slangin rocks, its recession proof dude.

[Patriot1208]

OP, ever thought about academia? With your public speaking passion it might be up your alley. Plus, you'll probably be teaching the same class over and over again so you won't need to know that much which seems like something you're worried about.

I'm not sure how competitive it is for law though, all I know about the professor track is via the PhD route.

I am honestly 100% lukewarm on the prospect of entering academia, there's really and truly nothing about it that flat-out appeals to me. I can imagine that the prestige is immense, but from other things I have glanced over on this site regarding the prospects of entering the field with law, it seems like the stakes are high in that area as well.

btw OP, when a lot of these ppl were talking about "being rich" in business, they mean like a mill or more a year...it is still quite reasonable/practical to be in the top 1-2% earning bracket of the US by graduating from a top law school

Reasonable? Top 2% these days is what, 200k? It's not really reasonable to expect to be making that much throughout your career coming out of law school unless it's HYSCCN.

Biglaw will pay you that much after aa couple of years, but many will leave before then. In house won't pay that much for a long time. AUSA doesn't pay that much. In fact, i'm not even sure it's reasonable out of HYSCCN. It's certainly possible, not necessarily reasonable.

[DoubleChecks]

OP, ever thought about academia? With your public speaking passion it might be up your alley. Plus, you'll probably be teaching the same class over and over again so you won't need to know that much which seems like something you're worried about.

I'm not sure how competitive it is for law though, all I know about the professor track is via the PhD route.

I am honestly 100% lukewarm on the prospect of entering academia, there's really and truly nothing about it that flat-out appeals to me. I can imagine that the prestige is immense, but from other things I have glanced over on this site regarding the prospects of entering the field with law, it seems like the stakes are high in that area as well.

btw OP, when a lot of these ppl were talking about "being rich" in business, they mean like a mill or more a year...it is still quite reasonable/practical to be in the top 1-2% earning bracket of the US by graduating from a top law school

Reasonable? Top 2% these days is what, 200k? It's not really reasonable to expect to be making that much throughout your career coming out of law school unless it's HYSCCN.

Biglaw will pay you that much after aa couple of years, but many will leave before then. In house won't pay that much for a long time. AUSA doesn't pay that much. In fact, i'm not even sure it's reasonable outside of HYSCCN. It's certainly possible, not necessarily reasonable.

i said TOP law school..i meant HYSCCN for the most part...lol, and considering OP has a 3.98 GPA and a 165 near cold diag, ima go with those schools being realistic options for him

[Patriot1208]

btw OP, when a lot of these ppl were talking about "being rich" in business, they mean like a mill or more a year...it is still quite reasonable/practical to be in the top 1-2% earning bracket of the US by graduating from a top law school

Reasonable? Top 2% these days is what, 200k? It's not really reasonable to expect to be making that much throughout your career coming out of law school unless it's HYSCCN.

Biglaw will pay you that much after aa couple of years, but many will leave before then. In house won't pay that much for a long time. AUSA doesn't pay that much. In fact, i'm not even sure it's reasonable outside of HYSCCN. It's certainly possible, not necessarily reasonable.

i said TOP law school..i meant HYSCCN for the most part...lol, and considering OP has a 3.98 GPA and a 165 near cold diag, ima go with those schools being realistic options for him

Even out of HYSCCN i'm not sure it's reasonable to expect to make that much. There just aren't enough jobs that make that much for an extended period of time. Even for all of those who get biglaw to begin with.

[DoubleChecks]

btw OP, when a lot of these ppl were talking about "being rich" in business, they mean like a mill or more a year...it is still quite reasonable/practical to be in the top 1-2% earning bracket of the US by graduating from a top law school

Reasonable? Top 2% these days is what, 200k? It's not really reasonable to expect to be making that much throughout your career coming out of law school unless it's HYSCCN.

Biglaw will pay you that much after aa couple of years, but many will leave before then. In house won't pay that much for a long time. AUSA doesn't pay that much. In fact, i'm not even sure it's reasonable outside of HYSCCN. It's certainly possible, not necessarily reasonable.

i said TOP law school..i meant HYSCCN for the most part...lol, and considering OP has a 3.98 GPA and a 165 near cold diag, ima go with those schools being realistic options for him

Even out of HYSCCN i'm not sure it's reasonable to expect to make that much. There just aren't enough jobs that make that much for an extended period of time. Even for all of those who get biglaw to begin with.

lulwut? if you factor in bonuses, thats like what, a 3rd yr at a biglaw firm? you're saying making the money of a 3rd yr at a biglaw firm is not reasonable or practical coming out of HYSCCN?

second, i never said extended period of time, but lets assume that anyways -- if you make a transition to in-house your 4th or 5th yr, whatevs, you'll take a pay hit. nevertheless, this varies GREATLY from firm to firm, and you'll have to keep in mind, a lot of the money goes into stock options now. you might now experience 5 yrs where you dont crack 200k...but that doesnt mean in-house lawyers coming from top firms never crack 200k again...in fact, id imagine many of them do (esp. after counting the stock options, etc.)

other ones that might go into other more lucrative jobs; some might even start their own small firms (even PI :O) or lateral into a mid or other biglaw -- these can also easily pay over 200k (with some having an even greater upside, though larger pay day = larger risk), etc. you might experience a dip in your early-mid 30s depending on your lifestyle/work choices coming out of a top law firm, but you would have hit 200k+ before and it is quite reasonable/practical to expect yourself to hit it again

[Patriot1208]

lulwut? if you factor in bonuses, thats like what, a 3rd yr at a biglaw firm? you're saying making the money of a 3rd yr at a biglaw firm is not reasonable or practical coming out of HYSCCN?

second, i never said extended period of time, but lets assume that anyways -- if you make a transition to in-house your 4th or 5th yr, whatevs, you'll take a pay hit. nevertheless, this varies GREATLY from firm to firm, and you'll have to keep a mind, a lot of the money goes into stock options now. you might now experience 5 yrs where you dont crack 200k...but that doesnt mean in-house lawyers coming from top firms never crack 200k again...in fact, id imagine many of them do.

other ones that might go into other more lucrative jobs; some might even start their own small firms or lateral into a mid -- these can also easily pay over 200k (with some having an even greater upside, though larger pay day = larger risk), etc. you might experience a dip in your early-mid 30s depending on your lifestyle/work choices coming out of a top law firm, but you would have hit 200k+ before and it is quite reasonable/practical to expect yourself to hit it again

Exactly, the only job that REGULARLY hits 200k+ is biglaw and almost everyone is out of biglaw within a few years. Almost every in house position will take a significant pay cut. You are right that if you work for Skadden and jump to Goldman Sachs this may not be the case, but for the vast majority of people who jump from nlj/vault firms to in house positions they will take a significant pay cut, often cutting their pay in half. Once you hit in house promotions and pay increases aren't guaranteed like they are in biglaw and you may never hit that much again. Some do, but some don't. And again, of course they can make that much with their own firm or lateraling into a smaller firm, but that is a gamble that isn't guaranteed.

The point being that if 75% of HYSCCN get biglaw, there aren't enough lucrative jobs post biglaw for them all to make that much again. We can speculate about how many that is, but my guess would be somewhere around 50% of those from HYSCCN are making that much late in their legal careers. Of course this excludes those who jump to other things and some willfully will make less doing something else. And this of course will be skewed to the top schools. I really don't think it is reasonable to expect to make that much. I think it might be very possible and a lot will, but a lot won't. There simply aren't enough jobs and of course going to HYSCCN doesn't mean you will be a succesful lawyer either.

[DoubleChecks]

lulwut? if you factor in bonuses, thats like what, a 3rd yr at a biglaw firm? you're saying making the money of a 3rd yr at a biglaw firm is not reasonable or practical coming out of HYSCCN?

second, i never said extended period of time, but lets assume that anyways -- if you make a transition to in-house your 4th or 5th yr, whatevs, you'll take a pay hit. nevertheless, this varies GREATLY from firm to firm, and you'll have to keep a mind, a lot of the money goes into stock options now. you might now experience 5 yrs where you dont crack 200k...but that doesnt mean in-house lawyers coming from top firms never crack 200k again...in fact, id imagine many of them do.

other ones that might go into other more lucrative jobs; some might even start their own small firms or lateral into a mid -- these can also easily pay over 200k (with some having an even greater upside, though larger pay day = larger risk), etc. you might experience a dip in your early-mid 30s depending on your lifestyle/work choices coming out of a top law firm, but you would have hit 200k+ before and it is quite reasonable/practical to expect yourself to hit it again

Exactly, the only job that REGULARLY hits 200k+ is biglaw and almost everyone is out of biglaw within a few years. Almost every in house position will take a significant pay cut. You are right that if you work for Skadden and jump to Goldman Sachs this may not be the case, but for the vast majority of people who jump from nlj/vault firms to in house positions they will take a significant pay cut, often cutting their pay in half. Once you hit in house promotions and pay increases aren't guaranteed like they are in biglaw and you may never hit that much again. Some do, but some don't. And again, of course they can make that much with their own firm or lateraling into a smaller firm, but that is a gamble that isn't guaranteed.

The point being that if 75% of HYSCCN get biglaw, there aren't enough lucrative jobs post biglaw for them all to make that much again. We can speculate about how many that is, but my guess would be somewhere around 50% of those from HYSCCN are making that much late in their legal careers. Of course this excludes those who jump to other things and some willfully will make less doing something else. And this of course will be skewed to the top schools. I really don't think it is reasonable to expect to make that much. I think it might be very possible and a lot will, but a lot won't. There simply aren't enough jobs and of course going to HYSCCN doesn't mean you will be a succesful lawyer either.

well see now we're just both guessing -- maybe im biased from all the anecdotal evidence i have, but even if i take your pessimistic view of "50%" of HYSCCN make that much "late in their careers," i still see that as reasonable/practical to expect $200k+. add to that my belief that it is higher than 50%, and neither of us can objectively prove otherwise, and you end up with me standing by my original comment

[Patriot1208]

lulwut? if you factor in bonuses, thats like what, a 3rd yr at a biglaw firm? you're saying making the money of a 3rd yr at a biglaw firm is not reasonable or practical coming out of HYSCCN?

second, i never said extended period of time, but lets assume that anyways -- if you make a transition to in-house your 4th or 5th yr, whatevs, you'll take a pay hit. nevertheless, this varies GREATLY from firm to firm, and you'll have to keep a mind, a lot of the money goes into stock options now. you might now experience 5 yrs where you dont crack 200k...but that doesnt mean in-house lawyers coming from top firms never crack 200k again...in fact, id imagine many of them do.

other ones that might go into other more lucrative jobs; some might even start their own small firms or lateral into a mid -- these can also easily pay over 200k (with some having an even greater upside, though larger pay day = larger risk), etc. you might experience a dip in your early-mid 30s depending on your lifestyle/work choices coming out of a top law firm, but you would have hit 200k+ before and it is quite reasonable/practical to expect yourself to hit it again

Exactly, the only job that REGULARLY hits 200k+ is biglaw and almost everyone is out of biglaw within a few years. Almost every in house position will take a significant pay cut. You are right that if you work for Skadden and jump to Goldman Sachs this may not be the case, but for the vast majority of people who jump from nlj/vault firms to in house positions they will take a significant pay cut, often cutting their pay in half. Once you hit in house promotions and pay increases aren't guaranteed like they are in biglaw and you may never hit that much again. Some do, but some don't. And again, of course they can make that much with their own firm or lateraling into a smaller firm, but that is a gamble that isn't guaranteed.

The point being that if 75% of HYSCCN get biglaw, there aren't enough lucrative jobs post biglaw for them all to make that much again. We can speculate about how many that is, but my guess would be somewhere around 50% of those from HYSCCN are making that much late in their legal careers. Of course this excludes those who jump to other things and some willfully will make less doing something else. And this of course will be skewed to the top schools. I really don't think it is reasonable to expect to make that much. I think it might be very possible and a lot will, but a lot won't. There simply aren't enough jobs and of course going to HYSCCN doesn't mean you will be a succesful lawyer either.

well see now we're just both guessing -- maybe im biased from all the anecdotal evidence i have, but even if i take your pessimistic view of "50%" of HYSCCN make that much "late in their careers," i still see that as reasonable/practical to expect $200k+. add to that my belief that it is higher than 50%, and neither of us can objectively prove otherwise, and you end up with me standing by my original comment

Fair enough.

Back to finals studying.